Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] QUIC connection migration and IPv6 only NAT64/DNS64 Networks (#2122)

Mike Bishop <> Wed, 12 December 2018 17:55 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 31D5D13118E for <>; Wed, 12 Dec 2018 09:55:14 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.459
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.459 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-1.46, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_32=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MAILING_LIST_MULTI=-1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key)
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 1NWNXzyOjK_U for <>; Wed, 12 Dec 2018 09:55:12 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3EF7B13118C for <>; Wed, 12 Dec 2018 09:55:12 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed/relaxed;; h=from:reply-to:to:cc:in-reply-to:references:subject:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:list-id:list-archive:list-post:list-unsubscribe; s=s20150108; bh=RfeLX9bXoNzpAHHfu+Ys7VqNPhg=; b=CIN6zT7qoLrjuFLR cI/LGsbhUt7DomUu7Eohrt+ydzzQQUOykrd+uls7GjlCEbqPsoIga8zZ+S0u0LOr y3DU97y4oc2HAnDMcWB3u4GBjj33Vhh3mUzlLoZdk36PQ8NboAnXILfFaoNBePdD EEtQCl1uN8U/0W032IMNngGMGqY=
Received: by with SMTP id filter0231p1iad2-1926-5C114B7C-9 2018-12-12 17:55:08.546624499 +0000 UTC m=+152312.526276231
Received: from (unknown []) by (SG) with ESMTP id ACwzkaFdSJiuNsBy8rYjiQ for <>; Wed, 12 Dec 2018 17:55:08.558 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 871BCC097A for <>; Wed, 12 Dec 2018 09:55:08 -0800 (PST)
Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2018 17:55:08 +0000
From: Mike Bishop <>
Reply-To: quicwg/base-drafts <>
To: quicwg/base-drafts <>
Cc: Subscribed <>
Message-ID: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/2122/>
In-Reply-To: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/>
References: <quicwg/base-drafts/issues/>
Subject: Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] QUIC connection migration and IPv6 only NAT64/DNS64 Networks (#2122)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--==_mimepart_5c114b7c80896_62103fa7e44d45c41678a"; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: list
X-GitHub-Sender: MikeBishop
X-GitHub-Recipient: quic-issues
X-GitHub-Reason: subscribed
X-Auto-Response-Suppress: All
X-SG-EID: l64QuQ2uJCcEyUykJbxN122A6QRmEpucztpreh3Pak2J3UKUts4n9zgSsLfzP/f5WZ1x8oxCySVtuL QrshXI2e8/S0Bb/OF/X6MNu+mLJ50qxOBcvajGtaiTszOyjG3BvL0THIW4I2HPyPO2uK3fn6CiOg/e MCMinrPt4X1/imbWJwYzr1NZYUUc4bYvZBCflp6D1U4ipPm7Xg37pB4OIWeYkJt8nKPO+LOhruzu9z E=
Archived-At: <>
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
List-Id: Notification list for GitHub issues related to the QUIC WG <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2018 17:55:14 -0000

@plakhera, my comment about addresses local to the client was thinking more about a server which is v4-only won't know how to construct a corresponding IPv6 address for the client network's NAT64.  The client would expect to discover those via DNS64 and needn't know that there's a relationship between the addresses.

Is there precedent for the NAT64 address mapping being (un)done on the client?

You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: